The precedent cited most frequently by the literature
of Indigenisation is that which was set by the Greek Fathers when they
used Greek cultural forms for conveying Christianity to the pagans in
the Roman Empire. Fr. Bede recommends this precedent to the mission in
India. "The Church," he says, "has a perfect model of how
it should proceed today in the way it proceeded in the early centuries.
Christianity came out of Palestine as a Jewish sect. Yet within a few
centuries this Jewish sect had taken all the forms of thought and expression
of the Greco-Roman world. A Christian theology developed
in Greek modes of thought, as did a Christian liturgy in Greek language
and in Greek modes of expression; a calender also developed according
to Greek and Roman traditions. Surely all that is a wonderful example
meant for our instruction of how the Church can present herself to an
alien world, receiving forms into herself while retaining her own Catholic
message."1

Another expert on Indigenisation is more explicit about
what the Church had done in the Greco-Roman world. "As we reflect
on the process," writes R.H.S. Boyd, "by which Christianity
in the earlier centuries became acclimatised in the Greek world, and by
which it made use of certain categories of Greek thought, we are struck
by the double face of its acceptance of 'secularised' Greek philosophy
and philosophical terminology, and its complete rejection of Greek religion
and mythology. Greek religion was gradually secularised. Philosophy was
separated from what had been a religio-philosophic unity. The
religious content - which had already been deeply influenced by secularisation
right from the time of Aristophanes and Euripides - developed into a cultural,
literary, artistic entity 'incapsulated' and isolated, except in the Orphic
and mystery traditions, from that living, existential faith which transforms
men's lives."2

There is no evidence that Greek culture had become secularised
before some of its forms were taken over by the Church. The history of
that period stands thoroughly documented by renowned scholars. The record
leaves no doubt that it was the Church which forcibly secularised Greek
culture by closing pagan schools, destroying pagan temples, and prohibiting
pagan rites. In fact, the doings of the Church in the Greco-Roman world
is one of the darkest chapters in human history. Force and fraud are the
only themes in that chapter. But facts, it seems, have no role to play
when it comes to missionary make-believe.

In any case, Dr. Boyd has convinced
himself that "there is at present a rapid process of secularisation
going on within Hinduism".3
He finds that philosophical Hinduism in particular has become "demythologized".
"It would seem, therefore," he continues, "as though Hinduism
were already started on the path followed by Greek religion. And so we
are led to the question of whether or not it is legitimate for Christian
theologians to use and adapt categories of what still purports to be religious
Hinduism, and yet is very largely secularised. What, indeed, is the real
meaning of the word 'Hindu'? Does it describe the fully mythological Hindu
religion? Does it describe certain philosophico-religious systems? Or
is it simply a synonym for 'Indian culture'? We shall find that some Indian
Christian theologians, notably Brahmabandhab, have believed that Christianity
was not incompatible with cultural, secularised Hinduism."4

Legitimate or illegitimate, compatible or incompatible,
the literature of Indigenisation provides ample proof that several Hindu
philosophies are being actively considered by the mission strategists
as conveyors of Christianity. The Advaita of Shankaracharya has been the
hottest favourite so far. The Vishistadvaita of Ramanuja, the Bhakti of
the Alvar saints and Vaishnava Acharyas, the Integral Yoga of Sri Aurobindo
and the Vichara of Raman Maharshi are not far behind. For all we know,
Kashmir Saivism and Shakta Tantra may also become grist to the missionary
mill before long. Missionaries working among Harijans are advocating that
the Nirguna Bhakti of Kabir and Ravidas should also be accepted as candidates
for service to Christianity. The more enterprising mission strategists
recommend that different systems of Hindu philosophy should he used for
tackling different sections of Hindu society. In the upshot, we are witnessing
a keen contest among Indigenisation theologians for acquiring doctorates
in Hindu religion and philosophy. Christian seminaries in India and abroad
conduct crash courses in the same field. Christian publishing houses are
manufacturing learned monographs, comparing Hindu philosophers with Christian
theologians - ancient, medieval, and modern. And the same operation is
being extended to other spheres of Hindu culture.

Fr. Bede is not bothered by considerations of legitimacy
or compatibility. What concerns him most is the need of the Church. "We
are faced," he says, "with a tradition of philosophy and mysticism,
of art and morality, of a richness and depth not excelled, and perhaps
not equalled, by the tradition of Greek culture which the Church encountered
in the Roman Empire. What then is our attitude towards it to be? It is
clear that we cannot simply reject it. The attempt to impose an alien
culture on the East has proved a failure. There are no doubt elements
in this tradition which we may have to reject, just as the Church had
to reject certain elements in the Greek tradition. But what is required
of us is something much more difficult. It is an effort
of discrimination, such as the Greek Fathers from Clement and Origen to
Gregory of Nyssa and Dionysius the Aeropagite undertook, not merely rejecting
what is wrong but assimilating all that is true in a vital act of creative
thought."5

This is not the occasion for an evaluation of the philosophical
calibre of the Greek Fathers. Those who have taken the punishment of examining
their performance without wearing theological glasses, tell us that even
at their best they were no more than practitioners of petty casuistries.
What comes in for questioning in the present context is the Christian
claim that Jesus scored over Zeus simply because some theological text-twisters
tried to pass Judaic superstitions as Greek sublimities. The history of
Christianity in the Roman Empire is not an obscure subject. The careers
of many Christian emperors, popes, patriarchs, bishops, saints, and monks
are proof that the contest between paganism and Christianity was decided
not by philosophical cajoleries but by brute physical force.

The mission in India had no scruples about using force
whenever and wherever it had the opportunity. It changed over to other
methods only when it could wield the whip no more. The
latest method sounds soft but is no less sinister. "Indigenisation,"
say Kaj Baago, "is evangelisation. It is the planting of the gospel
inside another culture, another philosophy, another religion."6
What happens in the process to that "another culture, another philosophy,
another religion" is not the mission's concern.

Fr. Bede give the clarion call. "In India,"
he says, "we need a christian Vedanta and a christian Yoga, that
is a system of theology which makes use not only of the terms and concepts
but of the whole structure of thought of the Vedanta, as the Greek Fathers
used Plato and Aristotle; and a spirituality which will make use not merely
of the practices of Hatha Yoga, by which most people understand Yoga,
but of the great systems of Karma, Bhakti and Jnan Yoga, the way of works
or action, of love or devotion, and of knowledge or wisdom, through which
the spiritual genius of India has been revealed through the centuries."7
Mark the words, "make use". The entire approach is instrumental
and cynical. Yet Fr. Bede calls it a "vital act of creative thought".
The whole business could have been dismissed with the contempt it deserves
or laughed out as ludicrous but for the massive finance and the giant
apparatus which the Christian mission in India has at its disposal.

As one surveys the operation mounted by the mission under
the label of Indigenisation, one is driven to an inescapable conclusion
about the character of Christianity: Christianity has been and remains
a sterile shibboleth devoid of a living spirituality and incapable of
creating its own culture. This spiritual poverty had forced Christianity
into a predatory career from the start. It survived and survives to-day
by plundering the cultures of living and prosperous spiritual traditions.

Christianity's predatory nature is loathsome to pagans
who have inherited and are proud of their own culture. Yet it is quite
in keeping with Jehovah's promise in the Bible. "Just as the Lord
your God promised to your ancestors, Abraham, Issac and Joseph,"
proclaims Jehovah, "he will give you a land with large and prosperous
cities which you did not build. The houses will be full
of good things which you did not put in them, and there will be wells
you did not dig, and vineyards and olive orchards you did not plant."8

The Bible preserves a graphic and gory record of how
the descendants of Abraham and Issac and Joseph helped Jehovah in fulfilling
this promise. They appropriated the lands and properties of the pagans
with a clean conscience. They were convinced that they were only taking
possession of what already belonged to them by the terms of a divine pledge.

Christianity claims that Jehovah switched his patronage
to the Church militant when the latter-day progeny of his earlier prophets
became disobedient and killed his only son. It was now the turn of the
Church to redeem the divine pledge. The history of the Church in many
lands and over many centuries shows that it did far better than the preceding
chosen people. It deprived the pagans not only of their physical possessions
but also of their cultural creations. The condottieri who carried out
the operation in the field of culture are known as the Greek Fathers.

It should not be a matter of surprise, therefore, that
the mission has started singing hymns of praise to Hindu culture. That
is the mission casting covetous glances before mounting a marauding expedition.
What causes concern is the future of Hindu culture once it falls into
the hands of the Church. The fate of Greek culture after it was taken
over by the Church is a grim reminder.

Hindu culture grew out of Hindu religion over many millennia.
The once cannot be separated from the other without doing irreparable
damage to both. The Christian mission is bent upon destroying Hindu religion.
Hindu culture will not survive for long if the mission succeeds. The plundered
Hindu plumage which Christianity will flaunt for a time is bound to fade
before long, just as the Greek and Roman cultures faded.

Let there be no mistake that the Christian mission is
not only a destroyer of living religions but also of living cultures.
It promises no good to a people, least of all to the Hindus.